BLUE ASH, Ohio -- A DVD that retails for $21.99 could cost a local man more than $100,000, News 5's John London reported.
Russell Lee is either a slick film pirate or an unwitting victim of someone who fits that description.
Paramount, which distributes "Coach Carter," presents an unflattering picture of him, saying he not only obtained the movie illegally, but that he uploaded it to an online system called eDonkey so others could steal it, too.
"I don't even know what they're talking about," Lee said. "I didn't do it."
Paramount has looked at all four computers in Lee's home, alleging he had one of them cleaned to erase evidence. The company has filed a federal lawsuit against the Blue Ash man.
But Lee claims that because his wireless connection was unsecured at the time, anyone could have parked near or in front of his home, tapped in and then driven off.
"If I can do anything to make people understand that please, if you're using wireless Internet, have somebody install it that knows what they're doing," he said. "Because if you don't, they could get in trouble just like me."
I just read this and started to wonder: there is so much pirating of porn in the P2P networks so how come we never hear about porn companies going after file sharers? The movie industry is always after them and filing insane copyright infringement lawsuits. What does everyone think about this? Is it because there is less than movie to made per movie? Or porn companies realize these downloaders don't hurt their sales as much as they would think? Or porn companies are under enough pressure from the government and rather lay low?
I suppose that a big part of them is under 18, so not a very interesting group at the moment. But they can get in touch with it and become a buyer or renter.
Porn companies do go after pirates, however, they are mostly going after pirated DVD's. As far as P2P's go, it seems rather pointless for porn companies to throw money at a problem already being tackled by the mainstream movie industry, with it's much greater resources.
That's true. They are going after the pirated DVDs. But I heard 50% of the traffic on the P2P networks are porn. But I guess what are you going to do if a lot of the people downloading are not of legal age which becomes even a greater issue.
I used to dl porn from P2P services. Before I did so I had never bought video porn in my life. Now I'm a confirmed buyer. But I would never had bought it if I hadn't got a taste for it first.
I truly believe that the porn industry is far less concerned about the direct dollar losses that P2P (I'll never say "pirating") represents than they are appreciative of the future revenue from people like me.
Consider: the shelf life of the average porn dvd is fleeting. The industry has its version of "The Lord of the Rings" -- say, "The Gangbang Girl 33" with Aurora Snow -- that'll be a major seller forever, but the vast majority of the stuff is discounted after 6 months -- or less. Mainstream studios would like to sell their stuff to cable or network TV (here in U.S.) and even the worst mainstream stuff will be found under Christmas -- or holiday, lol! -- trees within 2 weeks. But you can't say that about porn. Anybody here expecting porn under the tree this year?
So...how much are they really losing against future returns?
Edited by - Rumpled Foreskin on 12/14/2005 4:18:10 PM
Let's face it. $20 for an average gonzo movie is too high. The porn companies aren't going after P2P sharing because of the reasons already stated (it gains future customers, it's too costly to fight, and they want to keep a low profile), but I think it's because they have no justification for a $20 price tag on a POS, run-of-the-mill, paint-by-numbers gonzo movie.
When the record industry got up in arms over Napster, the Napster argument was, "Lower your prices on your shitty product." Some of the companies have done so, as have some of the major movie studios. When I was working at Amazon last year, we were dealing with Universal, who were the first to systematically lower their DVD prices. If they want customers back, the need to settle for a ridiculous 500% profit per disc, rather than their previously diabolical 1,000%.
I don't know what the profit margin is for porn companies per unit, so my reasoning might not apply to the Adult industry at all. Making side-by-side comparisons with Hollywood and the music industry might not be possible.
I don't think the markup for adult DVDs are as high. Less than 100%. Don't quote me but I know a majority of studios wholesale their DVDs for $1 or $2 so it's not like they're getting big bucks for it unless there's a huge bulk.
Porn companies do go after pirates - Factor in all the costs associated with making a film and having it appear on a disc, not just the per disc replication cost.
My understanding is that medium size bricks-and-mortars can expect to pay about 2/3 of retail cost to buy the disks. So, if the retail is $30 then they're paying $20. I'm sure it varies, but let's work with that number.
If the standard movie sells 2,000 units then the company is getting a whopping $40,000 for that movie. Considering all the expenses that have to come out of that $40,000, that doesn't appear to leave much room for obscene profits.
Again, as to porn companies going after P2P, it just doesn't make sense to do so. Not because of the "it's free advertising" argument, they get a ton of that from Google and other search engines, but simply because the mainstream movie industry is already fighting that fight with their much greater resources. Porn companies jumping in would make as much sense as you standing next to the fireman so you could piss on the fire he's hosing down.
PS - some costs to consider, Pagoda: 1. talent 2. location 3. cameraman/camera 4. director 5. lights 6. makeup/clothes 7. graphics artist 8. editor 9. food/water/lube/towels 10. equipment amortization 11. distribution 12. office rental/electric/water 13. staff salaries 14. office supplies
[Link]
myadultgroups Deactivated User
Los Angeles 755 Posts 10/04
Posted - Dec 14 2005 : 6:46PM
Jules Jordan went after some pirates personally last year on the east coast. He was pissed.
I considered most of the overhead you listed, Hardware. Those go with any movie production. What I don't know is how many units are sold of a typical title. The other two industries I named (Hollywood and recording) are pulling in net profits that are ludicrous, even with all those operating expenses considered. They could no longer justify charging that much to consumers, and they lowered their prices. Does the typical everyday gonzo title really only move 2000 units? If that's the case, then my assumption was wrong. Remember, I stated in my first post that I just might turn out to be mistaken?
Overhead is expenses that a studio incurs whether or not they are in production, and that cannot easily be assigned to a particular production; things like office rent, telephones, etc.
Talent, equipment rental, crew fees, and anythign else that can be assigned to a particular endevour are production expenses .
The income from a production must be enough to cover production expenses, some share of overhead, and still turn enough of a profit to make the risk of whole endevour worth while.
The idea that record companies or Hollywood film studios were making a 1000% profit or are now "only" making a 500% is just silly. If that were the case, all capital would flow into those businesses.
Of course it's silly. I was exaggerating. Don't you know how to interpret my sentiments, even though you can't hear my voice or see my face when I convey them? Geez, I'd think you guys would be able to read my mind by now. <<--- Look, an emoticon! Better? The point is... two industries saw room to cut costs, and to pass the savings on to consumers. When pressed to explain why they couldn't do so, they had no excuses.
When you say thing like "I consider talent fees overhead" it's very hard to get a handle on what you know, what you think you know and what you don't know.
I will admit I am very naive but the profit margin is razor thin??? I have a hard time understanding this please explain. A mainstream DVD sells for $15-$20 and the overhead is millions more. Are you saying the volume is so much lower it requires the $20-$30 price tag? (Or $50-$80 Adult store price?) I am not disputing I just would like better clarification.
1000% profits notwithstanding. Its not like the MPAA/RIAA lawsuit campaigns against p2p users have had any effect, other than promoting p2p, on filesharing of their titles. Since the big guns in the movie and recording industry started "fighting piracy" the users and traffic volume in p2p networks have increased rather dramatically.
So far no serious scientific study has made it clear that p2p is adversly affecting sales or moviegoing as a whole.
Which leads to the conclusion that fighting p2p is a losing battle.
Fighting actual piracy ie people who duplicate and sell others products and substitute their product for the real thing, in effect stealing a potential sale, appears to be a much easier and fruitful strategy. Its also a way to fight "piracy" that doesnt run the risk of alienating future, current or potential customers.
Porn by itself is considered if not illegal at least morally dubious so massive lawsuits against porn sharers seem very unlikely. I'd like to see a jury of offical porn lovers...
the point i just don´t get is why so many first class content porn websites are so cheap and dumb when it comes to protecting their paying consumers from getting their passes hacked (bangbros.com, jizzbomb.com, anabolicxxx.com, younameit.com). i´d really like to now how big the growth in revenue would be if they were well protected. there are exceptions (deluxepass, asstraffic), but you´ll find passes for each and every porn page in about one minute. all you have to do is use google.
Revenge of the Sith sells for 19.99 and cost $200,000,000 to make. In the theatre it makes almost half a billion world wide and THEN once it's released on DVD it sells about 2 million copies. Lots of profit in there. Compare to your average porn DVD. No theatrical release and an average of 2500 units sold. Consumers don't really want to spend more for porn than for a regular Hollywood release (in many cases they want to spend far less) therefore the profit margin is razor thin per unit sold.
Also, if a store is charging you 80 bucks for a DVD I can promise you that that does not reflect on the wholesale price. They are gouging the crap out of you.
But Quaze, last night on MSNBC they said porn movies cost as little as $50K to shoot, but rake in millions of dollars in profits. How do we know you're not crying poor... all the way to the bank? (In an Escalade with $12K spinner!)
The Best things In Life Are Chocolate 732 Posts 11/05
Posted - Dec 15 2005 : 11:21AM
The Adult Video Stores here in Toronto gouge you big time. And thier selection is so crap. I went into Adult King, seen a ton of dvd's for $49.99 I can go onto Fivestar DVD and get a Jenna Haze flick for $6.99 US and if I am lucky to find t=her titles here, they would be around $40 Canadian. So even with the exchange and shipping I get the dvd's for an average price of $15 Canadian. So I just order from FiveStar, Action-DVD and Videocanada.com, sometimes Adult Video Universe. Seems the online retailers have better prices than the local video stores have here.
A bricks and mortar store will have different overheads to an online store. In Canada, a store possibly has to deal with government licence to sell requirements? Who knows - I sometimes get DVD's from the US cheaper than I can get them here.
Yes, the compilations can bring a company a lot of extra cash because there's no residuals(as far as I know) to the actors and crew in the movie. So your only cost is making the DVD and distributing it.
Sure, compilations are the next best thing to 'found money,' but it takes a substantial library to get into that racket. Most of the players don't have that much old material to recycle.
Wait, the actors and crew get residuals for the non-compilation sales? For some reason I was under the impression that in the vast majority of cases, they just got a one-time payment for the scene.. Can an insider clear this up, for the record?
The vast majority of on camera jobs are one-time payment. Residuals are for people who have bargaining power (most usually from being in a union and working for a producer that signs a union contract) and/or a financial stake. Porn is no different. Is there some reason it should be?
Not that I can think of. That's why I posted, to see if codybangs knew something I don't. I'm gonna assume you're better-informed in this case (because it would mean that I was right ).
The only thing residual in porn is that little burning feeling that tells you it's time for more antibiotics.
And Tony, you've discovered my dark and evil secret. Sure other companies make pennies on the dollar profits but due to the sale of my soul to Satan, the all powerful host of the Netherworld it is only I who makes millions per title :)
Some of the distributors in Canada are unscrupulous characters and odds are that that DVD they're selling for $40 bucks has been heavily edited as well. It's also a pain getting each title passed by the Canadian censor board
Posted - Dec 14 2005 : 6:19AM